Thought I had got caught this morning
Discussion
Driving to uni this morning along the A12, was listening to the radio when the traffic bulletin interupted it, i leant down to turn the traffic news off and just as I looked up I saw myself going past what I thought was a scamera van parked on the verge, I glanced at my speedo and saw I was doing 80, (i think).
I was so pissed off, I was livid, I decided to scrap the Uni idea so turned off the road, went hooning round some country lanes to turn back on myself. I planned to go back and check it was a scamera van and then to park behind it, obscuring it's view, just to piss them off and stop them making any more money there.
I eventually went back and found it, it turned out it was an ANPR van, with a small DVLA logo on the side and a small sign in front of the camera. There were no police further along the road.
It made me think, how on earth could these things ever make anything safer? If I had seen it, I would have slammed the anchors on, even if I was on the limit. Afterwards I was absolutely livid and felt like throttling someone, certainly not slowing down as a result.
I think it may be time to get some counter measures, like laser and radar jammers, IR jammers etc.
I was so pissed off, I was livid, I decided to scrap the Uni idea so turned off the road, went hooning round some country lanes to turn back on myself. I planned to go back and check it was a scamera van and then to park behind it, obscuring it's view, just to piss them off and stop them making any more money there.
I eventually went back and found it, it turned out it was an ANPR van, with a small DVLA logo on the side and a small sign in front of the camera. There were no police further along the road.
It made me think, how on earth could these things ever make anything safer? If I had seen it, I would have slammed the anchors on, even if I was on the limit. Afterwards I was absolutely livid and felt like throttling someone, certainly not slowing down as a result.
I think it may be time to get some counter measures, like laser and radar jammers, IR jammers etc.
www.snooper.co.uk
or
www.beldirect.co.uk
SLD920X or Target LRC100 respectivly
Enjoy
(I have the snooper one currently attached to my bike)
or
www.beldirect.co.uk
SLD920X or Target LRC100 respectivly
Enjoy
(I have the snooper one currently attached to my bike)
I didn't "look" at the radio, I reached down (it's quite low). My view was also obscured by a lorry in the nearside lane and I could only see the van parked on the verge as I was level with it out of the corner of my eye.
I've no doubt I was looking ahead and concentrating, just a fluke that I didn't see it. Normally, I'd like to think I'm very observant, hence why I was so annoyed, that I missed it.
I've no doubt I was looking ahead and concentrating, just a fluke that I didn't see it. Normally, I'd like to think I'm very observant, hence why I was so annoyed, that I missed it.
If ANPR's catch uninsured drivers, drivers without MOT's, drivers without licences, I'll support their use 'till the cows come home.
As far as I can see, they are the only sensible sort of automated policing anyone has yet implemented.
And yes, if you are needing to take your eyes off the road to look at your radio, it sounds like you need to move the radio. "I wasn't looking at the road as I was changing the tape" wouldn't look good on an insurance claim form (or a gravestone.)
Oli.
As far as I can see, they are the only sensible sort of automated policing anyone has yet implemented.
And yes, if you are needing to take your eyes off the road to look at your radio, it sounds like you need to move the radio. "I wasn't looking at the road as I was changing the tape" wouldn't look good on an insurance claim form (or a gravestone.)
Oli.
Muncher
First of all, your a nawty boy for doing 80mph on an A road. But as you manged to do it in a rover i'll let you off m8.......after all that must take real nerves of steel
I like the idea of ANPR vans, but i also fear their use will become incorperated in to speed detection too at some point.
You need a road angel m8. I'll be in a good position to help there in a short while m8
First of all, your a nawty boy for doing 80mph on an A road. But as you manged to do it in a rover i'll let you off m8.......after all that must take real nerves of steel
I like the idea of ANPR vans, but i also fear their use will become incorperated in to speed detection too at some point.
You need a road angel m8. I'll be in a good position to help there in a short while m8
Oh dear.
Misconception about ANPR. IT IS NOT ABLE to check your insurance details. IT CAN ONLY check DVLA records & Police markers (eg, stop this idiot, he's driving a muppet waggon).
The ANPR system is not powerful enough to do insurance, as I recently found out. It's all a cleverly scripted lie to make you panic.
And since when did no tax make a car dangerous?
Hertsbiker....you work for the Ministry of Dis-Information?
Many years ago when you took out Insurance the certificate for a vehicle covered said " Any vehicle owned by the Policy Holder" Any change of vehicle a quick phone call to the Company and they made an alteration adding the details of the new vehicle at minimum cost because no new Certificate issued.
Some moons ago "Any vehicle etc" was removed and a specific vehicle Index Number inserted on the Certificate. Any alteration involved new Certificate being issued at some cost to the Company. Why?
Because Insurance Companies started to create a database of vehicles Insured. This data base is available to the Police and is one of the many areas that are checked by APNR.
Like any system these days it is only as good as the information fed in but I do understand that if nothing is recorded a marker will appear on the equipment and a pull will result to clarify.
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Saturday 24th January 15:38
Many years ago when you took out Insurance the certificate for a vehicle covered said " Any vehicle owned by the Policy Holder" Any change of vehicle a quick phone call to the Company and they made an alteration adding the details of the new vehicle at minimum cost because no new Certificate issued.
Some moons ago "Any vehicle etc" was removed and a specific vehicle Index Number inserted on the Certificate. Any alteration involved new Certificate being issued at some cost to the Company. Why?
Because Insurance Companies started to create a database of vehicles Insured. This data base is available to the Police and is one of the many areas that are checked by APNR.
Like any system these days it is only as good as the information fed in but I do understand that if nothing is recorded a marker will appear on the equipment and a pull will result to clarify.
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Saturday 24th January 15:38
Dwight VanDriver said:
Some moons ago "Any vehicle etc" was removed and a specific vehicle Index Number inserted on the Certificate. Any alteration involved new Certificate being issued at some cost to the Company. Why?
Because Insurance Companies started to create a database of vehicles Insured. This data base is available to the Police and is one of the many areas that are checked by APNR.
Like any system these days it is only as good as the information fed in but I do understand that if nothing is recorded a marker will appear on the equipment and a pull will result to clarify.
Except the law requires the driver to be insured not the vehicle.
So a database of insured vehicles is close to useless isn't it?
Not to mention that such use of ANPR will create a massive culture of number plate theft and car cloning.
If they carry on like this it won't be many years before 20% of vehicles have false registrations, then the whole system will be in deep doo doo. Mark my words.
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
safespeed said:
Some moons ago "Any vehicle etc" was removed and a specific vehicle Index Number inserted on the Certificate. Any alteration involved new Certificate being issued at some cost to the Company. Why?
Because Insurance Companies started to create a database of vehicles Insured. This data base is available to the Police and is one of the many areas that are checked by APNR.
Like any system these days it is only as good as the information fed in but I do understand that if nothing is recorded a marker will appear on the equipment and a pull will result to clarify.
Except the law requires the driver to be insured not the vehicle.
So a database of insured vehicles is close to useless isn't it?
Not to mention that such use of ANPR will create a massive culture of number plate theft and car cloning.
If they carry on like this it won't be many years before 20% of vehicles have false registrations, then the whole system will be in deep doo doo. Mark my words.
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
interesting concept, looks like they are going for the scattergun principal you know everyone gets a hit!!.
MoJo.
Dwight VanDriver said:
So whats your answer Paul?
Assuming we're talking about third party insurance, I'd stick an insurance surcharge charge on fuel. That'll fix it once and for all, and it cuts out all the red tape. No legal requirement to buy insurance. Every driver is insured. No extra cost of collection. No need to check insurance details.
It might leave us with a problem of 17 year olds in ill maintained Porsches. So I'd create a system of graduated driving licences. The main benefit of the graduated licences would be to "feed the safety culture" and encourage advanced driver training.
While we're at it we might as well scrap VED too. It's just a penny or two on a litre of fuel, and those that use the roads more pay more. Seems fair to me. We might get a problem of accumulation of old vehicles, and we'd have to look at how that would be addressed. Perhaps we'd have to have a charge for on road parking. Not sure about that one.
We'll stick the MoT certificate on the windscreen and finish the MoT database. And we'd verify registration details as part of the MoT.
That's an awful lot of problems solved, and an awful lot less work for the Police.
And for heavens sake - we need skilled trafpol dealing with the careless and the nutters and giving roadside education.
And I'd give the police powers to send bad drivers for training at their own expense (a similar system to a Police caution). The normal standard of legal evidence wouldn't be needed if the accused accepted the training. Anyone found to have caused an accident would be sent for training to help them not repeat the same mistake.
I'd scrap all the speed cameras (yes: ALL) and ask the police to enforce the speeding laws whenever and whereever they saw danger or potential danger caused by exceeding a speed limit. The Police would decide if it was a prosecution or a training issue.
I'm in the process of writing all this (and more) up in some detail.
The bottom line is that we have to give messages of care and responsibility to all road users in such a way that we improve the best road safety culture in the World. This is the only way that policy will reduce road casualties.
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
>> Edited by safespeed on Saturday 24th January 18:54
Mojocvh said:
The bottom line is that we have to give messages of care and responsibility to all road users in such a way that we improve the best road safety culture in the World. This is the only way that policy will reduce road casualties.
ps Paul is it snowing up there yet??
I wish I'd written: "The bottom line is that we have to give honest messages of care and responsibility..."
No snow yet - the outside thermometer says 4 degrees Celsius. (30 miles north of Inverness)
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff